Scanner for 8x10 Negatives

[bob carnie]

The 10000xl can scan multiple image size , in fact as many as you can fit on the bed, you marquee each image , set the contrast density, colour , and filesize, you hit the ALL button and the machine will scan them all . This will take time but I can assure you this works.

If the OP is serious and has thousands of slides and negs, I would then recommend the Front end of a Fuji Frontier with all the format holders without the processor , and I can lead he/her to a source for about $5000.00
We use this as well when clients bring in carosels of slides or binders of film, very fast and efficient with decent file size and colour correction and density capabilities.

Are we talking the same language now re batch scanning?.

The Epson 10000xl scanner itself does not have batch processing capabilities, processing of the image files takes place after the scanning. The Epson 10000xl does have batch scanning abilities though just like every other flatbed scanner I have ever used. Batch scanning is where you select multiple items on the scan bed and have the scanner scan them each to their own file.

[Light Guru]

The 10000xl can scan multiple image size , in fact as many as you can fit on the bed, you marquee each image , set the contrast density, colour , and filesize, you hit the ALL button and the machine will scan them all . This will take time but I can assure you this works.

Are we talking the same language now re batch scanning?.

Yes that's what I was referring to for batch scanning.

I love the large scanning bed of the 10000xl it is just really slow.

[Lenny Eiger]

Any guy who owns/operates a drum scanner is going to recommend a drum scanner. Would it be affordable to drum scan all your stuff? No. Not sure how Lenny would help here.

I was offering to talk to this fellow and give him some advice. I am quite capable of suggesting something to someone that does not include my services. I do it often.

If there are tens of thousands of scans, you don't need just a scanner, you need a scanning department. I agree with Bob, you can't quibble on hundreds of dollars for a project like this. Frankly, I wouldn't use any scanner made by Epson, which are plastic and will not last to the end of the task - you might need ten of them. Aztek did make a scanner called a Plateau, which was a high end scanner with a 18x24 bed. This might be something that would work, and be a balance between quality and speed.

It is true that I often think a drum scanner is more worth it in the long run. It doesn't take that much longer and I don't like the scans that come from Epson scanners. You can load up a lot of 35mm's on a single drum, and if you had two scanners, and 3-4 drums (and 8 hands), you could rock... but it is still too large a project to knock off in a few months, no matter how you do it.

Of course, as has been discussed here many times before, there are also considerable storage (and backup) concerns.

I have a similar issue with a lot of photographers who want to convert their entire portfolio and want me to quote a price for 200-500 images. I always tell them to edit, and cut down the numbers so that they spend money only on the best images. 200 is a lot of pieces of film to do, and scanning is expensive, be it in time or hard-earned dollars. I have done 200 only once and it took me months...

Lenny

[Jim Andrada]

And as others have said and Lenny has emphasized, the scanning is just the beginning of the process. A digital archive is not a simple thing - little details arise such as how it can be accessed in say 50 or 100 years after all current technology is history.

[Brian Ellis]

I have never seen an Epson scaner which would do a decent job wtih negatives.
I use a Microtek i900 which scans film beneath the bed. There is no glass between the film and the scanner light, thus more accuracy and sharpness. These are not available any longer, but Microtek does sell an equivalent. I have forgotten the new name for the company. You might be able to find an i900 or its big brother the i1800 used.

If you've never seen an Epson scanner that does a decent job with negatives, and if you're ever in my area, I'll be glad to show you my Epson 4990 so you will have seen at least one.

[massimodec]

I was offering to talk to this fellow and give him some advice. .....

... Aztek did make a scanner called a Plateau, which was a high end scanner with a 18x24 bed. This might be something that would work, and be a balance between quality and speed....

Lenny

I appreciate your advice and the way you did it.

I am having the same problem, since labs are not working on film anymore.
BTW this Aztek Plateau seems not in production anymore...

But the problem is the "philosophy" behind scanning: if we need a digital substitute of the negative, we should scan it to highest level and resolution, to reach a good imaging of the single grain of the film: a hard copy of the object, to save it for posterity.

If we need some proof of the images, for reference and filing, even pretty good to have "magazine" prints, it could be done also at home, with good meta data setting, otherwise you will not find anything...

Any other pretty good semi-pro scanning machine ?

[cabbiinc]

HP makes the Scanjet G4050 which will scan up to 8x10, but it's not worth the effort if you want too good of quality out of it.